I urge you to consider a super flexible stereo microphone variant: A stereo microphone similar to CSM88 except with an interchangeable top capsule. In other words, a bidirectional capsule permanently fixed to a stereo amplifier with 5 pin XLR, on the end of which the user can attach a second capsule of their choice - which can be any of your various side or end-address capsules. It would provide many Blumlein/Mid-Side stereo configuration options in a single stereo microphone.

It represents a unique product no other manufacturer produces, via a design which satisfies the requirements of multiple markets, and it should not be difficult to implement as you already have all individual component elements developed except the housing. The "both capsules in-line with the mic body" configuration is an important differentiation from your current "side-by-side" X/Y side-address or "one-atop-the-other" M/S end-address coincident stereo options. It would provide flexibility to the user in the form of a clear path forward regarding future purchases of additional 2nd capsules. You win with return customers, customers win with modular flexibility in a unique system.

If you want to get fancy, you can offer it with a switchable M/S matrix in the amplifier providing direct L/R output in addition to M/S (but please not L/R only without M/S output)

I offer this suggestion because I've thought about and wished for such a system for years. I would be especially interested in the end-address configuration using a C7 interference-tube gun Mid, as I find myself looking around at "fixed" stereo short-shotgun options: Neumann RSM 191A as the reference; AKG MKH-418S; Audio Technica BP4029; the new Sanken CMS-50..

I second Gutbucket's request. This is a VERY cool idea.

My additional request that an optional end cap be sold such that this theoretical mic could be used without the second interchangeable capsule - in other words, the "bottom" fig8 mic on its own as a mono mic. This would allow you to take that second capsule and use it elsewhere on another amplifier body. For a use example: this would allow someone to quickly change between compact Blumlein and a Faulkner array with only two capsules and amplifiers.

Thank you all, the idea is really cool, but I hesitate to do so.Pros:1. Easier wind screen, simple tube foam will do.2. No other product is the same.3. Flexible

Cons:1. Time align problem for end address setup. Front to back is more worst than side by side.2. More inventory.3. Not easy to align for side address setup.4. Have to make side address omnis..... Not ideal.

Will try to digest, for the FSM we're developing, the foam screen design is a challenge.

Cons:1. Time align problem for end address setup. Front to back is more worst than side by side.2. More inventory.3. Not easy to align for side address setup.4. Have to make side address omnis..... Not ideal.

Will try to digest, for the FSM we're developing, the foam screen design is a challenge.

1. If your are promoting FSM for M/S, it suffers the same problem.2. Granted! (as a manufacturer, I relate to this)3. Not a problem for end-address use, but yes, side-address would require a partially rotating top section into which the top capsule screws.. or more simply, perhaps a very thin knurled lock-rig as capsule-locking jam-nut if the threaded section of the capsule is long enough to accommodate it while still achieving a secure connection to the mic body and good conductor contact. 4. Only for vertical-orientation side-address use when an omni Mid is desired. Not a deal killer in my option if not available, as all your current side-address capsules would be available for use in vertical orientation. For horizontal end-address use, any of your current end-address omni capsules could be used.

Cons:1. Time align problem for end address setup. Front to back is more worst than side by side.2. More inventory.3. Not easy to align for side address setup.4. Have to make side address omnis..... Not ideal.

Will try to digest, for the FSM we're developing, the foam screen design is a challenge.

1. If your are promoting FSM for M/S, it suffers the same problem.2. Granted! (as a manufacturer, I relate to this)3. Not a problem for end-address use, but yes, side-address would require a partially rotating top section into which the top capsule screws.. or more simply, perhaps a very thin knurled lock-rig as capsule-locking jam-nut if the threaded section of the capsule is long enough to accommodate it while still achieving a secure connection to the mic body and good conductor contact. 4. Only for vertical-orientation side-address use when an omni Mid is desired. Not a deal killer in my option if not available, as all your current side-address capsules would be available for use in vertical orientation. For horizontal end-address use, any of your current end-address omni capsules could be used.

5. Easy windscreen!

1. Not really, for end address MS setup, the 2 capsules of FSM setup are time align.2. For XY or Blumlein side by side setup, since these are stereo instead of MS, horizontal time offset is not a problem, as it is much more coincident than ORTF, NOS... The space between the 2 capsules (center) are only 2.2cm.3. Front to back capsules arrangement for MS, the distance between the capsules is about 2.5cm, which should be time align, and I think this is a problem. Although those single body stereo shotgun seems to ignore this.I still cannot justify this, and yes, the windscreen is the easiest in this way.Appreciate your input.

[snip..] Front to back capsules arrangement for MS, the distance between the capsules is about 2.5cm, which should be time align, and I think this is a problem. Although those single body stereo shotgun seems to ignore this.

Please do not misunderstand, my intention for posting the link above was not a recommendation for using a shotgun microphone for such an application, and certainly not intended to imply that using a stereo shotgun for solo piano is in anyway a prefered method, but rather was meant only to serve as example of good sound quality despite imperfect coincidence of the capsules along the X-axis, with the bi-directional Side capsule placed immediately behind the Mid capsule. It is a continuation of the previous discussion about this type of extremely flexible/compact stereo microphone arrangement working acceptably or not.

If one were limited to using only such a in-line arranged M/S microphone for solo piano in a good hall, closer placement using an omni Mid rather than a interference-tube supercardioid Mid would be advisable. If not limited to using such a microphone, alternate stereo microphone arrangements such as what you've posted immediately above will generally be prefered. However, the converse is not true- in situations where a relatively highly-directional stereo microphone is appropriate, the substitution of omnis is unlikely to work well.

Classical pianist here. Omnis are THE way to properly capture a grand piano, IMHO.

This example certainly sounds excellent, but I would prefer the array to be placed quite a bit farther away and higher up to bring in more of the acoustic, or perhaps the "Decca Tail" placement. As it is, this is more of an intimate "jazz" sound to me.

I tend to prefer piano recordings that bring in much more of the space the instrument is sitting in, sort of like one would do with a pipe organ but with a drastically different direct / room ratio.

The interesting feature with VR Ball, is you can change the ratio between direct and reflection sound in post.This result is the taste this pianist preferred. I gave hime several different mix for him to choose. If it is a simple 2 mics setup, there is nothing you can do, except adding more reverb.

Classical pianist here. Omnis are THE way to properly capture a grand piano, IMHO.

This example certainly sounds excellent, but I would prefer the array to be placed quite a bit farther away and higher up to bring in more of the acoustic, or perhaps the "Decca Tail" placement. As it is, this is more of an intimate "jazz" sound to me.

I tend to prefer piano recordings that bring in much more of the space the instrument is sitting in, sort of like one would do with a pipe organ but with a drastically different direct / room ratio.

Again agreed. The suitability of omnis for piano recording has never been in question.

I'm simply attempting engagement in a deeper dialog with regards to the previous discussion.

Yes, fully understood. Still need to find out the best solution for product design. The axial distance is a consideration, but the figure-8 capsule doesn't respond to this direction at all. The axial direction of figure-8, actually arrived at the M microphone about the same time. So it is quite well in use.